Cancer Survivors Network - Comments for "cat scan but no pet scan"http://csn.cancer.org/node/197609
Comments for "cat scan but no pet scan"en-csnCAT/PEThttp://csn.cancer.org/node/197609#comment-873275
<p>Hi, Happypaddler-<br />
I love your screen name!</p>
<p>It was a colonoscopy followed by a CAT that got me my diagnosis and there was considerable discussion about how to stage my cancer. In fact I don't feel it was properly staged and I was never given the specifics most folks here get. The medical oncologist really wanted the PET, however, and he won the day - it was a good two weeks following diagnosis. I was told some insurers don't cover it but they got some specialist company to say that given the circumstances it was best to use a PET. And they did for the first couple of followups. I am now 2 years post treatment, went on Medicare last year and this year they only did a CAT with contrast.</p>
<p>From what I've read and the discussions here, PET has a slight edge over CAT but not a whole lot.</p>
<p>Good luck with getting it all in place and keep us posted... we are rooting for you!</p>
<p>Priscilla</p>
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 02:57:46 +0000pjjenkinscomment 873275 at http://csn.cancer.orgAgree with Marthahttp://csn.cancer.org/node/197609#comment-873225
<p>The PET does show things that the CAT cannot. And if anything is questionable on the CAT insist on the PET.</p>
<p>Sending good thoughts your way, and wishing you the best,</p>
<p>Cathy</p>
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 01:19:58 +0000cbs6931comment 873225 at http://csn.cancer.orgPET vs CAT Scanshttp://csn.cancer.org/node/197609#comment-873204
<p>Happypaddler,</p>
<p>I'm not sure what the answer is to your question, but if you want to go to this website, they might be able to help you. They actually have an "Ask the Expert" option and they'll e-mail you an answer. I found it quite by accident. I don't think we're supposed to post links here, but I'll just tell you that it's the University of Maryland Medical Center. I think it's umm.edu. </p>
<p>Hang in there - my husband was diagnosed over a year ago and is doing well. I suggest researching and gathering knowledge!</p>
<p>We're here for you, so don't feel like you're alone.</p>
<p>Barbara </p>
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:04:26 +0000BWKcomment 873204 at http://csn.cancer.orgHi!
So sorry yourhttp://csn.cancer.org/node/197609#comment-873172
<p>Hi!</p>
<p>So sorry your circumstances have brought you here, but I hope you'll find lots of support. As for PET vs. CT, I believe the PET can pick up things that a CT cannot. However, CT scans are still very reliable and, as Lori said, in Canada PET scans are not used at all or infrequently. If I were you, I would ask my doctor why I did not have a PET scan to see what he/she says. And if there are any questionable things on your CT scan that need further evaluation, I would insist on a PET. I know that some people also get MRI's, which would be something else to ask about. I wish you all the best and hope you'll keep us posted on how things are progressing toward treatment for you.</p>
Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:59:15 +0000mp327comment 873172 at http://csn.cancer.orghappypaddlerhttp://csn.cancer.org/node/197609#comment-873107
<p>Hi Happypaddler,</p>
<p>Sorry you had to be here. I had a pet-ct to stage me. Now I know there are several posters that have just had the ct. I believe in Canada, that they just use the ct. Now after they get the results of the ct scan, and hopefully this won't happen, they might want to proceed with a pet-ct. Anal Cancer has a 10% chance of metasis, which is very low. Now this depends on how advanced the cancer is and if it is Well, Moderately, or Poorly differentiated. Now I have good insurance, so that makes me wonder if thats why I didn't just have the ct. I am sure others will chime in. Welcome Lori.</p>
Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:33:43 +0000zcomment 873107 at http://csn.cancer.org